tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post5054585860110156440..comments2024-02-14T01:50:56.112-06:00Comments on The OF Blog: I Ain't Gonna Work on Maggie's Farm No More: William Morrow and Blogger ReviewersLarry Nolenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16001420558511460998noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-69351987804857910912011-12-05T10:08:37.480-06:002011-12-05T10:08:37.480-06:00Nick,
I don't think you read my post very car...Nick,<br /><br />I don't think you read my post very carefully. I don't request materials these days. Furthermore, your understanding of reviewing and what it entails is lacking. Review materials are akin to sample items sent by vendors to companies <i>for their consideration</i>; there is no obligation for either party. That one party is trying to make it so is the issue here.Larry Nolenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16001420558511460998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-73560104498864511122011-12-05T08:14:18.903-06:002011-12-05T08:14:18.903-06:00Frankly, this is an absurd objection. Publishers h...Frankly, this is an absurd objection. Publishers have a right to expect that the promotional copies they send out for review are actually being sent out for review and not just so someone can say 'look how cool I am with my ARC'. The only terms I can see are that they ask you to do what you say you want to do when they send you free books. Don't like it? Don't ask for free books!Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07151421349574401246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-22722276825379750222011-12-03T13:37:58.588-06:002011-12-03T13:37:58.588-06:00Martin,
I think if I had to distill it down and e...Martin,<br /><br />I think if I had to distill it down and eliminate some of the digressions in this piece, I would have asked rhetorically, "Could you work under these conditions?" Having a matter of weeks to consider, read, and review 1-3 titles from a single publisher and feeling coerced to do it in such a short window I suspect would put a lot of pressure on those who fret enough as it is about keeping their semi-hobby, semi-job running. I know I wouldn't (which is part of the reason why I dropped out of that rat race), thus the post.<br /><br />As for the hypotheticals, yes, they are quite a few, but it does bear raising them for consideration when I do believe that there are a host of related issues that may affect the quality of reviewing. I used to be less direct in my criticisms because I didn't care to be "that guy" that poo-pahs others' reviews, before I woke up to reality and decided that I'm the only one who really matters in the expression of my opinion. Reviews of crap books happen quite a bit, but when some feel that vague pressure not to call those festering leprous spots on a diseased mule but to instead polish that turd to a nice shine, then there are other issues that still tie into how reviewers see themselves vis-a-vis product suppliers.Larry Nolenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16001420558511460998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-44497586063278609912011-12-03T08:32:20.164-06:002011-12-03T08:32:20.164-06:00It is nice that you don't like grovelling but,...It is nice that you don't like grovelling but, as you said in your intro, you don't actually accept review copies so that is pretty irrelevant. You've opted out (as have I), this is about people who have opted in.<br /><br />As for the claims you make, I think they are just false. It in no way shifts the decision from reviewer to the publisher, it merely changes when the reviewer makes the decision (before instead of after receiving the book). I don't see how circulating a catalogue is any less pushing than direct tailored contact (which I don't believe is the norm anyway) but regardless of that it is ludicrously overblown to describe such a change as disconcerting.<br /><br />As for the idea that having to review shit books "can lead to a softening of critiques in practice", well, maybe but there are so many hypotheticals there that it is impossible to rebut. However, having to review shit books rather than just ignore them is, in fact, a positive thing. It restricts the options of the reviewer only in so much as it requires them to hold up their side of the bargain: that they actually review the book.Martinhttp://everythingisnice.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-78686754953172638282011-12-03T01:28:54.820-06:002011-12-03T01:28:54.820-06:00Wonderful rhyming lines at the top of the post. Bu...Wonderful rhyming lines at the top of the post. But well, I can't find anything so profoundly focused in the post herein. A lovely post though... Like the style of your writing.i doser mp3http://freeidoserdoses.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-75504965192495150812011-12-02T11:15:44.075-06:002011-12-02T11:15:44.075-06:00Martin,
While I see and understand your position,...Martin,<br /><br />While I see and understand your position, what I am objecting to is not so much the reorganization of how review copies are distributed, but rather the shift from publishers shopping wares for potential reviewers to a "hey, you can request this, but you have to do this for me" deal. It's a shift from the reviewer having the decision to the corporation. It makes great sense for WM to adopt such a thing, but I think establishing the sort of relationship where reviewers first have to <i>ask</i> rather than having the publicists pitching it to them first (which is what I see implied behind this letter; having a press release sort of catalog standing in place of personal e-contact) is rather disconcerting.<br /><br />I'm not the groveling sort of person. I don't have to agree to such terms and what I cover and how I cover it is not going to be appealing to several marketing departments. It may work for others who are willing to play ball with such terms, but I think it's unhealthy because it restricts the options available to some reviewers (choosing a book and then finding it to be utter shit and feeling obliged to review it lest the gig be pulled from you can lead to a softening of critiques in practice).<br /><br />For everyone: There's been a good pro/con discussion <a href="http://www.readandfindout.com/books/messageboard/236518/" rel="nofollow">at this forum</a> between myself and someone who works in a Canadian F/X studio about the whys, hows, and implications of this sort of model. I elaborate a bit more there and don't quite have the rantish tone that this original post contains. In addition, I might write a companion piece this weekend or next week dealing with a broader issue connected to this.Larry Nolenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16001420558511460998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-77824527472923494442011-12-02T09:28:36.367-06:002011-12-02T09:28:36.367-06:00Silly me, I forgot the fine folks of the Penguin i...Silly me, I forgot the fine folks of the Penguin imprints (Roc/DAW/Ace) and Pyr, all of whom do terrific outreach and promotion with the blogger/Web reviewersRobBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04014122096561992311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-50685441405916626012011-12-02T09:21:46.647-06:002011-12-02T09:21:46.647-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.RobBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04014122096561992311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-63109938101748753082011-12-02T09:15:19.184-06:002011-12-02T09:15:19.184-06:00I just saw this on Pat's blog and I'll rei...I just saw this on Pat's blog and I'll reiterate/expand what I said there:<br /><br />Harper, out of the big publishers, seems to think of the SFF genre as something of an afterthought at best. Granted, they publish a wide range of books as do Random House, Simon & Schuster, Macmillan (Tor), Hachette (Orbit). However, this letter seems very much directed at the SFF genre blogosphere/web reviewers, and I could be wrong, more than anybody else.<br /><br />Considering Tor, Orbit, and Random House (Del Rey / Spectra), and Simon & Schuster (who smarlty just let Baen handle their own Web publicity) have made outreach to genre bloggers/Web reviewers such a key element of their PR and marketing (and it seems to be working), this seems such a goddamned ass-backwards way of thinking. Just compare their Web presence to the others I've mentioned.<br /><br />Granted, William Morrow does publish Neil Gaiman, but not under any genre imprint and he's pretty much his own marketing beast anyway.RobBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04014122096561992311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-67473292882685317902011-12-02T09:13:57.554-06:002011-12-02T09:13:57.554-06:00I so rarely read review copies for some of the rea...I so rarely read review copies for some of the reasons you state - I like having no ties, I like reading on my own schedule, and love the variety I can read when ignoring the new and shiny. That being said, I'm on the fence about this letter. It's a tad strong and that I don't agree with, but I do see that especially with so many blogs popping up and so many doing the same books, some type of rules isn't necessarily bad. i.e. if bloggers have rules, why not publishers? Seems they didn't go about it very well though. heh. But then, if we don't like it, we can just not accept copies from them, right?Amyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18102250492155489672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-71808853366134913552011-12-02T07:33:05.357-06:002011-12-02T07:33:05.357-06:00I really don't see the issue here. Contrary to...I really don't see the issue here. Contrary to what you say above, it in no way threatens the neutral relationship between blogger and publisher. If such a thing existed in the first place, of course; complicity is an issue but it is a general one and the William Morrow email doesn't add any extra level to this.<br /><br />In the olden days (say, ten years ago), publishers sent out copies of all their titles to the reviews editors of a small number of publications. Those editors then assigned them to reviewers and the outcome was timely, professionally edited reviews of a selection of titles. Everyone is a winner.<br /><br />With the advent of the internet as a publishing platform, publishers realised that they had a way round the only limitation of the old system: a relatively small number of spaces for reviews to appear and hence a relatively small number of titles covered. So they applied the same model to bloggers and sent out large number of books to a large number of reviewers.<br /><br />The problem then is that the publishers have considerably increased their costs without any guarantee of the broad, timely coverage they want. So I'm not surprised some publishers are re-evaluting the model to make it more focussed. What William Morrow are saying seems eminently sensible to me: "Can you review one of our books in the next month? Great, we'll send you a free copy." If you can't review a book within a month but really, really want to review it then you can buy your own copy and review it at your leisure. I don't see anything objectionable about any of that.<br /><br />Access to free books is not a god given right for bloggers.Martinhttp://everythingisnice.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-28273730187549632852011-12-02T01:40:50.862-06:002011-12-02T01:40:50.862-06:00Maybe it's the 13-year-old in me, but I will p...Maybe it's the 13-year-old in me, but I will probably ignore them from now on. I have enough to read that I've bought let alone for review.<br /><br />Then again, I also see it as their prerogative. If that's what they want they are welcome to it. They also run the risk of people seeing the sham for what it is and not trusting any review of their books. Bad form, just plain bad form.Bryce L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13951278240008332023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-29169321652847869642011-12-01T22:40:48.784-06:002011-12-01T22:40:48.784-06:00It'd be the same for me, except I do that most...It'd be the same for me, except I do that most of the time anyway as a matter of course.Larry Nolenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16001420558511460998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-88458782875902314582011-12-01T22:38:06.065-06:002011-12-01T22:38:06.065-06:00That would be an automatic "ignore publisher&...That would be an automatic "ignore publisher" for me.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16094675116398769415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-72284269899726174342011-12-01T20:24:26.411-06:002011-12-01T20:24:26.411-06:00Not used to hearing "absolutely right" s...Not used to hearing "absolutely right" said about one of my opinion pieces, but thanks :DLarry Nolenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16001420558511460998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8068873.post-61120377587478135562011-12-01T20:14:50.492-06:002011-12-01T20:14:50.492-06:00Well written, Larry. You're absolutely right....Well written, Larry. You're absolutely right.Jdiddyesquirenoreply@blogger.com